The Death of the Fashion Scandal
At some point in fashion, controversy stopped being seen as momentum and became a failure. The industry used to thrive on it, treating risk as artistic intention. Now, it comes with flashing red sirens warning of reputational danger. How did an industry built on provocation become so afraid of it?
When we skim through fashion history, most of the moments considered revolutionary now were a huge scandal at their time. Think of Alexander McQueen, the man known for his dramatic runway shows. McQueen shifted runways from clothing exhibitions to theatrical performances. One of his most famous shows is the “Highland Rape” collection, released for the A/W 1995 season. Models walked with torn clothing, exposed skin, and smeared makeup. The title and the silhouettes were considered aggressive and violent, with audiences accusing McQueen of romanticizing sexual violence. Despite still sparking debate, the collection was later interpreted as a commentary on colonial violence and reframed as a defining moment in fashion. McQueen’s shows risked accusations of cruelty and exploitation, but in exchange, they expanded fashion’s capacity for narration. Discomfort became a creative language, and his brand identity inseparable from risk.
Similarly, when Vivienne Westwood introduced punk aesthetics into high fashion, her designs were seen as vulgar and anti-fashion. They challenged class structure and respectability. Clothes that referenced fetish, violence, and anti-authority imagery blurred lines between fashion, sexuality, and political aggression. Punk was widely seen as offensive, a social threat. For Westwood, that was precisely the point: conveying anger and refusal. Because she took the risk, punk moved from subculture to fashion mainstream, showing how clothing can be a statement of ideology.
Another revolutionary moment in fashion was in 1966 when Yves Saint Laurent created “Le Smoking”, a tuxedo suit designed for women. It was the first haute couture tuxedo marketed to women. The suit was considered inappropriate and unfeminine to the point where women got denied entry to restaurants for wearing it. A woman dressed like a man disrupted social hierarchies. YSL’s design became a cultural shift, challenging gender norms and permanently altering their place in fashion. Today, putting a women’s tuxedo on the runway would not be considered risky, but that is because Saint Laurent did it even when it was.
These controversies were not PR accidents; they were intentional risks, and the mechanism through which fashion evolved. 20 years ago, shows and campaigns could recover from scandals. What changed was not people’s taste but the structure of the industry. As the internet and social media have become embedded in our daily lives, PR and reputation management have become increasingly significant in every industry. While this was a necessity, it also caused harm to creative industries like fashion. Now that images circulate without context or explanation, judgment is way louder than interpretation, and risk is more relevant to reputation than creativity.
It is undeniable that some provocations cause real harm and deserve criticism. The media plays an essential role in holding these accountable, preventing future instances. However, the intended lesson seems to have turned into paranoia in brands, having a high creative cost. Since discomfort and risk-taking became reputationally expensive, experimentation and radicalism were narrowed down.
Creativity is revolutionary when it has room to be misunderstood and even rejected. Yet fashion exists within a contradiction: the art of it rewards risk while the industry of it punishes it. By choosing safety over the possibility of backlash fashion may avoid harm, but it also avoids discovery. Fashion has not just lost its scandals, but also the very things that made it what it is.
XOXO, The Fashion Stock Market
